More zone coverage...

JOESAM2002 · 07-04-2003, 07:16 PM

Saints | To Use More Zone Coverage
Fri, 4 Jul 2003 09:54:01 -0700

Jeff Duncan, of the New Orleans Times-Picayune reports for the Sporting News that New Orleans Saints defensive coordinator Rick Venturi plans on using more zone coverage this season to defend against the mobility of the quarterbacks they will face in 2003. This allows his defensive personnel to have their eyes on the backfield to monitor the quarterback.

BillyCarpenter1 · 07-05-2003, 08:32 AM

Zone defense, Man to Man, Cover two. I don\'t know what defense the Saints should play. I\'m just trying to figure out if the Saints defense is going to be vastly improved this year.

I\'ve read up on each of the new players we singed this year and I still have no idea of how our defense is going to play. If someone has figured out how the defense is going to do this year, there is a job for you in the NFL somewhere, or at the very least a job at ESPN as a football analyst,

Since I have given up on trying to figure out how the Saints defense is going to do this year, I feel like I need some kind of comfort they will be improved this year. But, where do I find this comfort I\'m looking for? Well, the same coaches that brought in all the talent we now have on offense are the same coaches that brought in the new faces on defense this year.

The coaches had a plan on offense and I don\'t think anyone(myself included) thought that the offense would be as good as it is. Say what you want to about the coaches, but do you rememeber the saints offense before Haslett?

The coaches brought in their players on offense and it worked. I have no reason to beleive that they will not do the same with the defense.

lumm0x · 07-05-2003, 10:32 AM

Zone is also a lot more user friendly to a young defense as they have to worry most about where they should be, and not where their man is. Unfortunately they will face two recievers in our division that have made a name for themselves by finding zone holes, Keyshawn and Peerless.
The problem I have with zone, unless they turn it into a very agressive blitzing one, is that is allows the offense to operate to what you open to it. It is a bend but not break mentality. I realize it may be the best concept for our yound D, but I have always appreciated the attacking and agressive D\'s that dictate the game.

BillyCarpenter1 · 07-05-2003, 10:57 AM

I think the reason that the Saints will play more zone coverage this year is because we have speed at the linebacker position, which is vital to any success they will have.

All linebackers must demonstrate six basics in order to be effective in playing good zone pass defense: (1) play recognition (is it a run or a pass?); (2) a knowledge of their individual zone responsibility; (3) an understanding of the proper techniques that the linebacker should use in getting to his zone, (4) an ability to recognize offensive pass patterns; (5) the capacity to know when to focus on the quarterback; and (6) the talent to react properly to the ball once it is thrown.
A deficiency in any of these can render the linebacker ineffective and can contribute to a poor performance by the defense.

nocloning · 07-05-2003, 11:37 AM

Maybe they are giving the mobile quarterbacks just a little too much credit. Zone is the best defense to counter the QB run, but I\'m not sure it\'s easier for the young players. Isn\'t it easier to play man-on-man and shut down your opponent? You wouldn\'t have to worry about staying in the right zone, there would be less misunderstandings (I guess). By the way: If you leave out the front 4 the defense is not really that young, just not used to playing together.
Never was a big fan of the zone defense, I also like the more aggressive style better.

lumm0x · 07-05-2003, 01:25 PM

I agree with the comments about LB speed, and I think it also must include LB inexperience. If we start Ruff, Allen and Hodge, or Rodgers works his way in there somehow, they will be either a young group or a group very unused to cooperating. The zone would allow them to react at plays developing and utilize their athleticism. It would also prevent many misread plays that press coverage can create by focusing strictly on a man and getting decoyed out of position.
I also agree that we are crediting too much on the QB scrambling. With the exception of Vick our divison is made of statue QB\'s. Really only 1/4 of our schedule will see a highly mobile QB. The only problem I see with man coverage is in our LB and safety roles. I think Carter, Ambrose and Thomas can effectively play man, but with new safeties and a unknown at LB ability it may create alot of blown plays.

Any QB can be good when given all day to throw....get in his damn face. It\'s tough to through when looking at the roof.

07-04-2003, 07:16 PM	#1
JOESAM2002 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: CRYSTAL BEACH TEXAS Posts: 4,100	More zone coverage... Saints \| To Use More Zone Coverage Fri, 4 Jul 2003 09:54:01 -0700 Jeff Duncan, of the New Orleans Times-Picayune reports for the Sporting News that New Orleans Saints defensive coordinator Rick Venturi plans on using more zone coverage this season to defend against the mobility of the quarterbacks they will face in 2003. This allows his defensive personnel to have their eyes on the backfield to monitor the quarterback.

07-05-2003, 08:32 AM	#2
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209	More zone coverage... Zone defense, Man to Man, Cover two. I don\'t know what defense the Saints should play. I\'m just trying to figure out if the Saints defense is going to be vastly improved this year. I\'ve read up on each of the new players we singed this year and I still have no idea of how our defense is going to play. If someone has figured out how the defense is going to do this year, there is a job for you in the NFL somewhere, or at the very least a job at ESPN as a football analyst, Since I have given up on trying to figure out how the Saints defense is going to do this year, I feel like I need some kind of comfort they will be improved this year. But, where do I find this comfort I\'m looking for? Well, the same coaches that brought in all the talent we now have on offense are the same coaches that brought in the new faces on defense this year. The coaches had a plan on offense and I don\'t think anyone(myself included) thought that the offense would be as good as it is. Say what you want to about the coaches, but do you rememeber the saints offense before Haslett? The coaches brought in their players on offense and it worked. I have no reason to beleive that they will not do the same with the defense.
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209

07-05-2003, 10:32 AM	#3
lumm0x Resident antediluvian Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,026	More zone coverage... Zone is also a lot more user friendly to a young defense as they have to worry most about where they should be, and not where their man is. Unfortunately they will face two recievers in our division that have made a name for themselves by finding zone holes, Keyshawn and Peerless. The problem I have with zone, unless they turn it into a very agressive blitzing one, is that is allows the offense to operate to what you open to it. It is a bend but not break mentality. I realize it may be the best concept for our yound D, but I have always appreciated the attacking and agressive D\'s that dictate the game.

07-05-2003, 10:57 AM	#4
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209	More zone coverage... I think the reason that the Saints will play more zone coverage this year is because we have speed at the linebacker position, which is vital to any success they will have. All linebackers must demonstrate six basics in order to be effective in playing good zone pass defense: (1) play recognition (is it a run or a pass?); (2) a knowledge of their individual zone responsibility; (3) an understanding of the proper techniques that the linebacker should use in getting to his zone, (4) an ability to recognize offensive pass patterns; (5) the capacity to know when to focus on the quarterback; and (6) the talent to react properly to the ball once it is thrown. A deficiency in any of these can render the linebacker ineffective and can contribute to a poor performance by the defense.
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209

07-05-2003, 11:37 AM	#5
nocloning 100th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 302	More zone coverage... Maybe they are giving the mobile quarterbacks just a little too much credit. Zone is the best defense to counter the QB run, but I\'m not sure it\'s easier for the young players. Isn\'t it easier to play man-on-man and shut down your opponent? You wouldn\'t have to worry about staying in the right zone, there would be less misunderstandings (I guess). By the way: If you leave out the front 4 the defense is not really that young, just not used to playing together. Never was a big fan of the zone defense, I also like the more aggressive style better.
nocloning 100th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 302	\"What is Wal-Mart? Is it like they sell wall stuff?\"

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

07-05-2003, 01:25 PM	#6
lumm0x Resident antediluvian Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,026	More zone coverage... I agree with the comments about LB speed, and I think it also must include LB inexperience. If we start Ruff, Allen and Hodge, or Rodgers works his way in there somehow, they will be either a young group or a group very unused to cooperating. The zone would allow them to react at plays developing and utilize their athleticism. It would also prevent many misread plays that press coverage can create by focusing strictly on a man and getting decoyed out of position. I also agree that we are crediting too much on the QB scrambling. With the exception of Vick our divison is made of statue QB\'s. Really only 1/4 of our schedule will see a highly mobile QB. The only problem I see with man coverage is in our LB and safety roles. I think Carter, Ambrose and Thomas can effectively play man, but with new safeties and a unknown at LB ability it may create alot of blown plays. Any QB can be good when given all day to throw....get in his damn face. It\'s tough to through when looking at the roof.